R. Kelly claims "unknown conspirators digitally dropped him" into video with young girl

The Smoking Gun ^ | 12.2.03

[mhking]

DECEMBER 2--Alleged pedophile R. Kelly is one inventive guy. The 36-year-old R&B singer is under indictment on child porn charges in Florida (where he allegedly possessed illicit still images) and Illinois (where he supposedly filmed himself with a young girl). When he was nabbed earlier this year in Miami, Kelly told cops, according to the below police report, that "former managers" might have been trying to set him up, "taking pictures of people that look like me" cavorting with the underaged. Kelly has now extended that defense, as it were, to his Cook County case, according to a motion filed yesterday. While simultaneously questioning whether his video co-star was a minor, Kelly notes that he might mount a "computer morphing" defense. The performer, it seems, may argue that some unknown conspirators digitally dropped him into the raunchy video (or, perhaps, replaced his of-age consort with a computer-generated partner based on an actual minor girl). This trial should be a hoot--especially when Kelly's legal team calls George Lucas as its first defense witness. Call it the Industrial Light & Magic defense. (6 pages)

[Alter Kaker]

Possession of the video could be construed as possession of child pornography.

So you have committed sex crime?

[T. Jefferson]

I guess they digitally installed the urine he sprayed all over the underage girl. Of course, he immediately started doing only gospel tunes after this, and started doing free songs for the children. Send the sick little boy to jail and let some of the inmates give him a new reason to sing.

[T'wit]

If Dean gets the Democratic nomination, there's no telling what videos might appear a month or two before election day.

[Sloth]

This is a pretty transparent lie, but the reality is that this will become a legitimate defense in a number of years when high-quality video editing will become available to anyone & framing someone with digitally altered video will be a real possibility (see the movie Rising Sun).

[mhking]

So you have committed sex crime?

I don't/didn't possess the video, so technically, no.

[ConservativeMan55]

I'll keep your screen name in mind.

If I do "find" that video, you will be the first to hear about it, lol.

[ConservativeMan55]

LOL! They always accuse the black man don't they?

[IncPen]

I've got cheap video editing software on my computer. I can and have easily put people's heads on other's heads. Insert video with other video.

This is a realm in which I have a fair amount of experience. I'm going to be vague here, out of necessity, but this will illustrate the absurdity of Kelly's claim.

Last fall I had a client who had a multi-million dollar endorsement deal with a ********* manufacturer. I guarantee that you would know who this client is.

My client made the mistake of using a competitor's product in a video that he/she had ready to be released. No one caught it until it was almost too late.

Digitally blurring the competitor's product (held in my client's hand) cost well over $100,000 - for less than 3 minutes (yes, three) minutes of video. The fix we made was a "bandaid" solution, a hack to get the product out the door.

Think: 3 minutes of video @ 30 frames per second = 5,400 frames, each 'blur' hand positioned. We couldn't use motion-tracking because of the fingers in the shot...

We did not replace the offending product with the sponsor's product, we merely blurred out the offending image. Consider this: we had two people working virtually around the clock on state of the art graphics systems for four days to do this. And they gave us a break on the price for eventual bragging rights for having done it.

I can't argue that it's possible to do 'cheesy' stuff in your own home, but to do it on a magnitude that he's claiming - and have it be convincing - is damn near impossible.

Even if I granted him the benefit of the doubt that it 'could' be done, the cost alone would be (easily) into large seven figures.

Mr Kelly, try again.

_{How many FReepers would 'get it' if I mentioned Michael Rivero being called as an expert witness?}

[chudogg]

Whats pretty funny is that his career blew up after this, his songs are on the radio all the time, and he is a guest in almost every rappers video. I guess it enhanced his "street cred". No more of him singing "I believe i can fly"

[liberallyconservative]

I believe he says he has watched it, not that he possesses it. This video was, and still is, easily viewed over the internet, if one so chooses.

[chudogg]

I've got cheap video editing software on my computer.

Yeah if you want your video coming out like SOUTH PARK! To be able to make a video that is realistic, be anaylzed by police and experts, and hold up in court, it pretty much has to be the real thing.

If it were as easy it you claim Bin Laden's ugly face would be plastered everyother day on T.V. with a picture of a recent newspaper.

[Bogey78O]

His two defense claims are contradictory. Hope he doesn't try and ply them both at the same time.

[weegee]

A few years ago I heard that digital photos were not admissible in court because of the lack of an original negative. There is no way to tell if the file was manipulated or not (just looking for tell tale signs in the picture itself).

Here's a refresher of the technique for still images from earlier this year:

LA Times' apology for altered war photo

Genuine

Composite (with the man holding up his hand at the man and child)

[liberallyconservative]

Is this the same Michael Rivero who runs the website WhatReallyHappened.com which he began after the Vince Foster fiasco?

[Ronin]

I have heard that stuff is easily detected by the people who know the software, however.

[ConservativeMan55]

Nothing wrong with South Park, lol.

[Libloather]

From - http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1025282/posts

More Kids For Michael Jackson?

Michael Jackson recently revealed that he wants to have more children. During an interview with a Los Angeles radio station on October 30th about "What More Can I Give," his all-star single that benefits various charities, the King of Pop was asked if there were plans for any more babies in his life. Jackson answered, "I want a big family. More and more children." He added that he would like to have even more kids than his father -- there were nine children in the Jackson household. However, a representative for Jackson was less committal when speaking to MSNBC.com, saying, "It's not like he has a specific strategy or he's in touch with adoption agencies about this."

Jackson will be honored with a Lifetime Achievement Award at the Third Annual Power of Oneness Awards to be held on Saturday, November 15th at the Universal Studios Hollywood Globe Theatre in California. Oneness is a non-profit organization that promotes racial unity through music, the arts and education. This year's other honorees include actor Ed Begley, Jr. and the Jim Henson Company.

Jackson's collection of hits Number Ones is due to be released on November 18th. It includes one new song, "One More Chance," co-written by soul star R. Kelly.

[IncPen]

Is this the same Michael Rivero who runs the website WhatReallyHappened.com which he began after the Vince Foster fiasco?

The inventor of tinfoil headwear, indeed.

[liberallyconservative]

I am sure that bit of trivia had nothing to do with his appearance at said legal proceedings; more likely his ownership of Animation Plantation made him the "expert witness."

[Lady Eileen]

In case some Freepers don't know, this is the same R. Kelly who recently co-wrote a song with Michael Jackson called "One More Chance" for Wacko Jacko's newly released album.

I pray neither of them gets another chance.